Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T08:40:07.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sandeels in the diets of seals: application of novel and conventional methods of analysis to faeces from seals in the Moray Firth area of Scotland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

G. J. Pierce ,
P. R. Boyle ,
J. S. W. Diack  and
I. Clark
G. J. Pierce
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Aberdeen, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen, AB9 2TN
P. R. Boyle
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Aberdeen, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen, AB9 2TN
J. S. W. Diack
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Aberdeen, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen, AB9 2TN
I. Clark
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Aberdeen, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen, AB9 2TN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Serological methods for prey identification have been applied to detection of residues of sandeel (Ammodytidae) protein in faeces of common seals (Phoca vitulina) and grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) from the Moray Firth, north-east Scotland. Antisera raised to muscle protein from Ammodytes marinus were evaluated by testing their reactions with protein extracts made from a range of North Sea fish species and protein residues in in vitro digestates, seal digestive tracts and seal faeces. It was concluded that, using fused rocket immuno-electrophoresis, linkage of precipitin peaks from unknown samples with peaks from standard sandeel extract was a reliable indicator of the presence of sandeel in the unknown sample. Seasonal variation in the incidence of sandeels in common seal diet in the Moray Firth was examined by identifying otoliths, bones, and proteins, and all three methods indicated that sandeels occurred in the majority of samples tested in the summer, but were less important during the winter. Proteins were detected in fewer samples than otoliths, particularly in February and March. Possible reasons for this difference are discussed. Serological identification of sandeel proteins is potentially applicable to dietary studies on all marine predators.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 70 , Issue 4 , November 1990 , pp. 829 - 840
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, R.S., 1986. Food consumption by seabirds in the North Sea in relation to natural mortality of exploited fish stocks. International Councillor the Exploration of the Sea (CM Papers and Reports), G: 5, 8 pp.Google Scholar
Boreham, P.F.L. & Ohiagu, C.E., 1978. The use of serology in evaluating invertebrate prey/ predator relationships: a review. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 68,171–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, P.R., Grisley, M.S & Robertson, G., 1986. Crustacea in the diet of Eledone cirrhosa (Mollusca: Cephalopoda) determined by serological methods. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 66, 867–879.Google Scholar
Daan, N. (ed.), 1989. Data Base Report of the Stomach Sampling Project 1981. Copenhagen: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. [Cooperative Research Report 164.]Google Scholar
Feller, R.J. & Gallagher, E.D., 1982. Antigenic similarities among estuarine soft-bottom benthic taxa. Oecologia, 52, 305–310.Google Scholar
Feller, R.J., Taghon, G.L., Gallagher, E.D., Kenny, G.E. & Jumars, P.A., 1979. Immunological methods of food web analysis in a soft bottom benthic community. Marine Biology, 54, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grisley, M. & Boyle, P.R., 1985. A new application of serological techniques to gut content analysis. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 90, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grisley, M. & Boyle, P.R., 1988. Recognition of food in Octopus digestive tract. Journal of Experi-mental Marine Biology and Ecology, 118, 7–32.Google Scholar
Harkonen, T., 1986. Guide to the Otoliths of Bony Fishes of the Northeast Atlantic. Hellerup, Denmark: Danbiu ApS.Google Scholar
Harvey, J.T., 1988. Population Dynamics, Annual Food Consumption, Movements, and Dive Behaviors of Harbor Seals, Phoca vitulina Richardsi, in Oregon. PhD Thesis, Oregon State University.Google Scholar
ICES, 1989. Report of the multispecies assessment working group. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (CM Papers and Reports), Assessment 20,125 pp.Google Scholar
Kunzlik, P.A., 1989. Small Fish Around Shetland. In Seabirds and Sandeels. Proceedings of a seminar held in Lerwick, Shetland, 1988 (ed. M., Heubeck), pp. 38–49. Lerwick: Shetland Bird Club.Google Scholar
McConnell, B.J., Prime, J.H., Hiby, A.R. & Harwood, J., 1984. Grey Seal Diet. In Interactions Between Grey Seals and UK Fisheries, pp. 148–153. Cambridge: SMRU, NERC.Google Scholar
Payne, P.M., Nicolas, J.R., O'brien, L. & Powers, K.D., 1986. The distribution of the humpback whale, Megaptera novaengliae, on Georges Bank and in the Gulf of Maine in relation to densities of the sandeel, Ammodytes americanus. Fishery Bulletin. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the United States, 84, 271–277.Google Scholar
Pierce, G.J., Boyle, P.R. & Diack, J.S.W., in press a. Digestive tract contents of seals in Scottish waters: comparison of samples from salmon nets and elsewhere. Journal of Zoology.Google Scholar
Pierce, G.J., Boyle, P.R. & Thompson, P.M., 1990 a. Diet selection by seals. In Trophic Relations in the Marine Environment. Proceedings of the 24th European Marine Biology Symposium (ed. M., Barnes and R.N., Gibson), pp. 222–238. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar
Pierce, G.J., Diack, J.S.W. & Boyle, P.R., 1989. Digestive tract contents of seals in the Moray Firth area of Scotland. Journal of Fish Biology, 35 (supplement A), 341–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, G.J., Diack, J.S.W. & Boyle, P.R., 1990 b. Application of serological methods to identification of fish prey in diets of seals and dolphins. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 137, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, G.J., Thompson, P.M., Miller, A., Diack, J.S.W., Miller, D., & Boyle, P.R., in press b. Seasonal variation in the diet of common seals in the Moray Firth. Journal of Zoology.Google Scholar
Prime, J.H. & Hammond, P.S., 1987. Quantitative assessment of gray seal diet from fecal analysis. In Approaches to Marine Mammal Energetics (ed. A.C., Huntleyet al.), pp. 165–182. Lawrence, Kansas: Society for Marine Mammalogy.Google Scholar
Svendson, P.J., 1973. Fused rocket immunoelectrophoresis. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, 2 (supplement 1), 69–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, C.B., O'neill, E. & Kirby, R., 1986. ‘ELISA’ as an aid to the identification of fish and molluscan prey of birds in marine ecosystems. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 96, 97–102.Google Scholar
Weeke, B., 1973. Crossed immunoelectrophoresis. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, 2 (supplement 1), 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, A., 1969. The Fishes of the British Isles and North-West Europe. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar